The Facts:WHO?-Suspect 1 has a famous obsession with jewellery and has fantasised about owning the Crystal Heart diamond for herself. She also lives near the museum where it was kept.

- Suspect 2 works in the garden of Suspect 1, which is next to the museum where the diamond was kept, and is rumoured that he is in love with Suspect 1 and would do anything to please her enough into marriage.

- Suspect 3 has a strong desire for a bigger house for her multiple highly-trained dogs that are very important to her, and also has it in for Suspect 2 ~ who chased one her her dogs away for peeing on the garden lawn of Suspect 1. ​

HOW?

​- the diamond was last recorded being in the museum at 3:30am in the morning, and then gone when it was next checked on at 7am.

- a piece of paper with "For my love of" and the last bit torn or chewed away.

- Lock was unpicked, with garden shears left outside the door, by the catflap.

- Alarm System wires cut by 'something sharp'.

- Security Guard in charge of guarding the diamond had been away looking for his cat between 4am and 6:30am, which he found eventually up a tree - terrified and in panic.

- Suspect 1 did not have the diamond in their possession, but was very nervous about the police being near her jewellery cabinet.

- Suspect 3 did not have the diamond either, and was very pleasant and cooperative with the police in helping them search her entire house.

- Diamond eventually found by police in Suspect 2's closet, who looked shocked to see it there ~ and was in the process of washing up some animal pee he had found on his carpet, when the diamond was discovered. His front door was apparently "unlocked".

- Suspect 2 denies any involvement in this diamond theft.

WHY?

-LADY ELIZABETH: It is unlikely that Suspect 1 physically stole the diamond herself as there is little evidence to support this other than her house was nearby. However, Suspect 1could have been nervous about the police being near her jewellery because she was trying to hide something, or hoped the jewellery wouldn't remind them of anything. Furthermore, there is possibility she could have used Suspect 2 (due to their relationship, if the rumours were true) to steal the diamond for her, and now is just not owning-up since the plan has not worked out and doesn't want to get into trouble. The cryptic message on the cabinet where the diamond was kept could potentially have been "For my love of diamonds", if Suspect 1's obsession with diamonds was so great that she had to leave spoken passionate messages about it - but this would certainly not be very clever... The only other possibility is that she did steal the diamond herself and wanted to pin the blame on her gardener, so that she was not accused and he would take the blame - framing him The garden shears used to pick the lock and the diamond found in his closet would support this. This would be a very cold thing to do, but if the rumours were true and she did not love Suspect 2 in return, perhaps she had an extra motive to get rid of him. But there's no evidence other than the rumours to support this theory...

- GARDENER GUS: Suspect 2, if the rumours are true, could have stolen the diamond on Suspect 1's demand. Or alternatively, could have wanted to steal the diamond and give it to her to win her love in marriage. The garden shears left by the door seem to have been used to pick the lock, and of course Suspect 2 is a gardener by trade - which suggests this would be the best tool to use. How he would get in past the alarm system though, which would likely be programmed to sound if the door was opened or if the diamond was removed from its case, remains a mystery. But it is possible it failed to go off on entry and Suspect 2 snipped the wires with the garden shears just to be sure, before attempting to remove the diamond from its case. The fact that Suspect 2 would leave such an important piece of evidence behind is also in question ~ unless Suspect 2 just simply isn't very smart. Also, the note could have been a cryptic message to Suspect 1 ~ "for my love of you", or something ~ as an extra effort to win her heart through the deed of stealing and presenting her the diamond. Furthermore, the cat being chased up the tree could have been Suspect 2's doing - as we know he has a reputation for chasing Suspect 3's dog away, so could do the same with a cat ~ likely as part of the plan to lure the security guard away. But it's supposed to be 'dogs' that Suspect 2 is known to hate, not cats... He is not specifically known to hate animals in general...

​- OLD GRAN ARIANNE: Suspect 3 is the only suspect without "rumours" surrounding her motivations, as she "claims" her passion is to get a bigger house for her dogs. It is also a fact that she is very angry with Suspect 2 for how he treated her precious dogs once. With several ridiculously well-trained dogs at her disposal, she could have carried out some sophisticated manoeuvres to break into the museum and remove the diamond from its casing, as well as place it where she liked - despite her age. The dogs and their numbers offer both numbers and skill to make this happen. Is it not a little too convenient that GARDEN SHEARS are left so plainly at the scene of the crime for all to see, and then the diamond is found in his closet as he's cleaning up ANIMAL URINE from his carpet, suspiciously? The fact that Suspect 3 was also so willing to help the police search her house raises a question ~ for Suspect 1 was nervous despite the diamond not being in her house, and Suspect 2 was "shocked" to see the diamond in his place, like he did not know it was there. It could be that Suspect 3 was confident because she knew the diamond wasn't there and was innocent, but it could also be because she knew exactly where the diamond WAS being kept and wanted to appear as innocent as possible before the police. Then there's the security guard's cat 'Tibbles' ~ which would certainly be "terrified" of a group of dogs chasing it away, and small dogs such as these could fit through Tibbles' cat flap, which was only too small for any "human" to get through. The note left on the cabinet as well could have been anything from a passionate cryptic message to Suspect 2 about "For my love of dogs" as her motivation, to a deliberately ambiguous message to support convicting Suspect 2 of the crime ~ framing him under the motivation of "for my love of you" or "for my love of Lady Elizabeth". Again, it seems a little overly convenient... And if Suspect 1 is implied to be involved, the message could have been made to fool others into thinking it meant "For my love of jewels/diamonds". It seems ambiguous enough that the case can fuel on the rumours between Suspect 1 & Suspect 2 as organising this robbery together, and if they were both to go to jail ~ with Suspect 3 being on the 'good side' of the police ~ there is a possibility that the big house belonging to Suspect 1 could belong to her (or at the very least she could be in a good bargaining position for it with Suspect 1), while she also gets her revenge on Suspect 2.

​SO THE GUILTY ONE IS....?

= SUSPECT 3 - OLD GRAN ARIANNE

~ She used her dogs to get through the cat-flap.

~ Some of her dogs could have infiltrated the museum while others chased away the security guard's precious cat so that he would go out looking for it and not witness the robbery take place.

~ We know the dogs were VERY well-trained and saw that they could stand on each other's heads, pour cups of tea, and more. It is not unthinkable that they could have used their training to reach and tear the wires of the alarm system with their SHARP TEETH.

~ Once the alarms were down, Arianne herself (or her dogs) pick the lock of the door with a pair of garden shears, (which she chose specially for this).

~ She, with the help of her little dog army, takes the diamond and runs for it ~ leaving a cryptic message so as to mislead the police, (whether this was combined with a clever subliminal message of her passion for dogs is down to theory).

~ She then has the diamond placed in Gardener Gus' closet. We know his door was found "unlocked" that morning, and we have seen how the dogs and Arianne can break into locked doors already.

​

~ As an extra message of spite to the Gardener, for chasing away her dogs long ago, she gets her dog to pee on his floor. Even if this wasn't deliberate, the animal pee on the floor that Gus was washing up the next day implies that there were animals in his house the night before - and they were most likely Arianne's dogs.

Why would she do this?- Revenge against Gardener Gus for her precious dogs.

- Hoping to frame him, and involve Lady Elizabeth too, but feeding on the rumours between them both that Gus was in love with her and wanted to marry her - while also using Lady Elizabeth's love for jewellery against her too.

- As well as having Gus in jail, she could have Lady Elizabeth potentially convicted too. If she was to be arrested, Elizabeth could potentially lose the house - or not want to live there anymore anyway if she had a reputation as a jewell thief. At any rate, a big house becoming available would be just what Arianne would want for her dogs ~ as she has admitted publicly before.

IN CONCLUSION:

Arianne wanted revenge on Gus and so framed him in hope he would be arrested. There may very well have been an ulterior motive to get Elizabeth convicted too - in hopes that she would lose the house so Arianne could snap it up instead. She achieved this clever crime by using her well-trained dogs, but it was her passion that was her downfall as she left too many clues behind that could be used against her. Don't worry folks, SHE'S off to jail now! She first stole the diamond, and now she's stolen the show - and I'm sure she's regretting it... *chortle*

​

CASE 1 -

"The Stolen Diamond" ~ Issue 03

What're you doing here? Have you by any chance been reading a DETECTIVE DUKE story and wondering how the mystery was eventually solved? Say no more - you have come to the right place! Here on this page of the website, we unravel the mysteries put forward in that comic and uncover the truth. Here you will get to see if you were right all along with your original deduction of what happened...